I am seeing the movie just for this scene, but I can’t bring myself to watch it.
Aaron
I saw it at NYFF, and in my opinion, it’s not one of Lars Von Trier’s strongest films. I mean, it’s not terrible though. It starts out brilliantly, but as the film progresses it just becomes ridiculous. Many of the audience members were too shaken that they didn’t really know how to feel.
al b.
just watched the whole thing on youtube… not a movie I’m gonna rush to see again in theaters, but still the most interesting movie I have ever seen!
Adam Smith
Seriously, if the ASC had to announce nominees tomorrow, I’d be both shocked and pissed if Anthony Dod Mantle didn’t end up on that list (because he’d deserve to win this year–Slumdog was fine, but there more deserving winners of the nominees, not to mention snubbed marvels like “Let The Right One In”‘s Hoyte Van Hoytema). It won’t get nominated for anything, because old people have sensitive stomachs, but in a just world, Anthony Dod Mantle would be winning his first Oscar in February (because in this same just world, Wally Pfister would be smiling at the statue on his mantle right now).
Al b., how did you get it on YouTube? I keep trying different searches and coming up empty.
leocdc
Mmmmm I already have the movie on mi PC… it’s on some sites that I believe I can’t mentioned… but it’s free to see it if you don’t bother with that ways of get it :P
al b.
Search ANTICHRIST (all in caps) and you can literally find the whole movie! To be safe try searching by part i.e. part1, part2 etc.
I would hurry before it gets removed
Brian
Out of context, this is fucking hysterical?
Paul Outlaw
The Antichrist on YouTube isn’t the Von Trier film…
Andrew R.
Oh it’s there alright…
Robert Hamer
A couple of my friends actually wanted to see this movie with me despite my repeated warnings, thinking it would be something like Saw or Hostel. Boy, were they in for a surprise.
david
Mu curiosity will eventually get the better of me and I’ll watch this film, but I’m sure I’ll always regret having done so.
This scene isn’t even that weird in context to the entire film. There’s so much other crazy shit happening that a talking fox is hardly the strangest of it.
Aleksis
Willem Dafoe’s face is scarier and weirder than anything else about the film.
Will
is it as scary as i’ve read in most reviews? i’m literally too scared to watch the clip let alone the whole film which i know is easily available online
I’m not sure when I’ll see this, but I will at some point, you can bet on it. Internet critic Dustin Putman called it the darkest and most demanding film he’s ever seen. So, understandably, that caught my attention.
Sound Designer Dan
Did anyone else think of Mortal Kombat after watching this?
Alfredo
Worst Film I’ve seen in a long time. The cinematography was good but other than that the film was trash. The “plot” made no sense. The dialogue was awful. The “shocking” scenes weren’t that shocking to me and you could tell they were put there specifically to piss people off. Don’t take my word for it though go see it for yourself.
Speaking English
Not about Antichrist, but I just saw A Serious Man and you would be happy to know, Kris, it has taken over Bright Star as my favorite film of the year.
My head is still spinning. I am ready to say with complete conviction that the Coens are the most ingenious filmmakers/philosophers/enigmas working today. Thank goodness for them.
Lance
The basic theme of this film is that nature and the world we live in, is chaotic and the most evil in this world is right before us in nature itself. I guess there are other themes, but this is the theme they put on the poster and repeat throughout the film. Do they present this theme in a clever way? I don’t think so and instead of revealing it through the subtext, they throw it at us in the most disgusting ways that are not that far off from “Saw” type shock moments.
I think “No Country For Old Men” covers this theme in a much more clever and interesting manner.
leocdc
My parents saw it today and found it totally absurd, with no development of plot and meaningless. And also totally bored.
2 things comes to mind with that:
1) This is really a movie of love/hate
2) I think that if I see it I’ll find worthy just the artistic part of the movie… (that I already love for what I’ve seen on trailers)
And amen to No Country for Old Men… it’s so great the way it represents the evil on our society…
No it doesn’t. It’s a snide comment. “People literally shit on canvas to then have it heralded as great art.” A pointless aside, though I imagine it makes you feel better about hating “Antichrist.”
You’re fully within your right to think it’s a poor film, as am I to think it’s a work of art. But if someone took a shit on a canvas, I wouldn’t consider it art, so, your comment, again, addresses nothing but your need to take the film down without engaging in an actual conversation about it.
lance
Kris – Yes, the idea has more of a chance to be lost by many people when its told through the subtext (I think that’s what you meant) , but, for me, art shouldn’t hand you those ideas on a silver platter – it should make you think and bring about a conversation. I guess I’m saying you should have to put a little more work into it.
No, that’s actually not what I meant. Though it is true, which is neither here nor there, but anyway…
I think the film is about much more than the actual imagery. And to suggest Von Trier is lazy is to not know his work.
Antichrist manages to be about catharsis, modern psychology treatment, faith, the battle of the sexes, genre commentary, and yes, grief, among many, many other things, all at once. I’d say he put plenty of work into it.
Lance
Kris – No, I didn’t mean that the filmmaker was lazy – I was just talking about how veiled the major theme should be. I think the VIEWER should have to do more work. For me when it is explained to you, it becomes more of a parable than a greater artistic work of art.
Comments
40 responses to “Truth”
Now can someone explain why can’t I see this film in a move theater, paying a ticket, but I can see it on YouTube?
I am seeing the movie just for this scene, but I can’t bring myself to watch it.
I saw it at NYFF, and in my opinion, it’s not one of Lars Von Trier’s strongest films. I mean, it’s not terrible though. It starts out brilliantly, but as the film progresses it just becomes ridiculous. Many of the audience members were too shaken that they didn’t really know how to feel.
just watched the whole thing on youtube… not a movie I’m gonna rush to see again in theaters, but still the most interesting movie I have ever seen!
Seriously, if the ASC had to announce nominees tomorrow, I’d be both shocked and pissed if Anthony Dod Mantle didn’t end up on that list (because he’d deserve to win this year–Slumdog was fine, but there more deserving winners of the nominees, not to mention snubbed marvels like “Let The Right One In”‘s Hoyte Van Hoytema). It won’t get nominated for anything, because old people have sensitive stomachs, but in a just world, Anthony Dod Mantle would be winning his first Oscar in February (because in this same just world, Wally Pfister would be smiling at the statue on his mantle right now).
I agree, the cinematography in it was beautiful.
Al b., how did you get it on YouTube? I keep trying different searches and coming up empty.
Mmmmm I already have the movie on mi PC… it’s on some sites that I believe I can’t mentioned… but it’s free to see it if you don’t bother with that ways of get it :P
Search ANTICHRIST (all in caps) and you can literally find the whole movie! To be safe try searching by part i.e. part1, part2 etc.
I would hurry before it gets removed
Out of context, this is fucking hysterical?
The Antichrist on YouTube isn’t the Von Trier film…
Oh it’s there alright…
A couple of my friends actually wanted to see this movie with me despite my repeated warnings, thinking it would be something like Saw or Hostel. Boy, were they in for a surprise.
Mu curiosity will eventually get the better of me and I’ll watch this film, but I’m sure I’ll always regret having done so.
This scene isn’t even that weird in context to the entire film. There’s so much other crazy shit happening that a talking fox is hardly the strangest of it.
Willem Dafoe’s face is scarier and weirder than anything else about the film.
is it as scary as i’ve read in most reviews? i’m literally too scared to watch the clip let alone the whole film which i know is easily available online
The movie is pretty terrible. That said, the prologue is perhaps the most stunning film sequence of the decade.
What Loyal said… is the truth. Awful, awful film, great beginning.
Muppets reign…
Will: I consider the film to be, psychologically, one of the most terrifying films ever made. And a brilliant work of art.
looks nice but, as a film, it’s just plain awful
Art is an interesting way of putting it Kris. As a movie, it doesn’t work at all. It’s nonsense really. Silly, not scary. An experiment gone awry.
But as art, I mean, people literally shit on canvas to then have it heralded as great art. In that regard, Antichrist fits the definition perfectly.
I’m not sure when I’ll see this, but I will at some point, you can bet on it. Internet critic Dustin Putman called it the darkest and most demanding film he’s ever seen. So, understandably, that caught my attention.
Did anyone else think of Mortal Kombat after watching this?
Worst Film I’ve seen in a long time. The cinematography was good but other than that the film was trash. The “plot” made no sense. The dialogue was awful. The “shocking” scenes weren’t that shocking to me and you could tell they were put there specifically to piss people off. Don’t take my word for it though go see it for yourself.
Not about Antichrist, but I just saw A Serious Man and you would be happy to know, Kris, it has taken over Bright Star as my favorite film of the year.
My head is still spinning. I am ready to say with complete conviction that the Coens are the most ingenious filmmakers/philosophers/enigmas working today. Thank goodness for them.
The basic theme of this film is that nature and the world we live in, is chaotic and the most evil in this world is right before us in nature itself. I guess there are other themes, but this is the theme they put on the poster and repeat throughout the film. Do they present this theme in a clever way? I don’t think so and instead of revealing it through the subtext, they throw it at us in the most disgusting ways that are not that far off from “Saw” type shock moments.
I think “No Country For Old Men” covers this theme in a much more clever and interesting manner.
My parents saw it today and found it totally absurd, with no development of plot and meaningless. And also totally bored.
2 things comes to mind with that:
1) This is really a movie of love/hate
2) I think that if I see it I’ll find worthy just the artistic part of the movie… (that I already love for what I’ve seen on trailers)
And amen to No Country for Old Men… it’s so great the way it represents the evil on our society…
I’m not sure that addresses anything Loyal, but whatever.
Lance: Sometimes being clever gets in the way of a definitive statement about something.
leocdc: I wouldn’t be going to my parents for an opinion of this film, but that’s just me.
um, I would feel squeamish if my parents even knew this film existed!
I think it addresses the proclamation that Antichrist is a “brilliant work of art.”
No it doesn’t. It’s a snide comment. “People literally shit on canvas to then have it heralded as great art.” A pointless aside, though I imagine it makes you feel better about hating “Antichrist.”
You’re fully within your right to think it’s a poor film, as am I to think it’s a work of art. But if someone took a shit on a canvas, I wouldn’t consider it art, so, your comment, again, addresses nothing but your need to take the film down without engaging in an actual conversation about it.
Kris – Yes, the idea has more of a chance to be lost by many people when its told through the subtext (I think that’s what you meant) , but, for me, art shouldn’t hand you those ideas on a silver platter – it should make you think and bring about a conversation. I guess I’m saying you should have to put a little more work into it.
No, that’s actually not what I meant. Though it is true, which is neither here nor there, but anyway…
I think the film is about much more than the actual imagery. And to suggest Von Trier is lazy is to not know his work.
Antichrist manages to be about catharsis, modern psychology treatment, faith, the battle of the sexes, genre commentary, and yes, grief, among many, many other things, all at once. I’d say he put plenty of work into it.
Kris – No, I didn’t mean that the filmmaker was lazy – I was just talking about how veiled the major theme should be. I think the VIEWER should have to do more work. For me when it is explained to you, it becomes more of a parable than a greater artistic work of art.
I just finished watching the film. I never want to think about it again.
I don’t believe in those boundaries, lance. I guess it’s just a difference of opinion.